Report on the process and outcomes of the consultation carried out by Knightstone Housing Association on the proposed options for the Carriageworks and Westmoreland House site. Vivid Regeneration LLP, October 2013

1

Contents

1. Executive Summary – Community Involvement Statement ........................................................... 2

2. Background ..................................................................................................................................... 5

3. Purpose of the report ..................................................................................................................... 5

4. Purpose and objectives of the consultation ................................................................................... 6

5. The consultation process ................................................................................................................ 7

6. Results of the consultation ............................................................................................................. 9

7. How the workshops influenced the decision making to arrive at a final design option............... 17

8. Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 19

Appendix 1 Options ................................................................................................................................. 0

Appendix 2 Scoring the three options .................................................................................................... 9

Appendix 3 Survey ................................................................................................................................ 12

Appendix 4 Additional information boards .......................................................................................... 13

2

1. Executive Summary – Community Involvement Statement In conducting its consultation, Knightstone Housing Association (KHA) has complied well with the recommendations contained in BCC’s Statement of Community Involvement 2008. KHA appointed independent facilitators, worked closely with established community and business organisations, and planned and implemented a wide range of consultation events, including themed workshops, “mini” consultations at existing forums, an open weekend and an online and paper based survey. It recorded and publicised all its findings, and developed a huge amount of information boards and design materials reflecting the Community Vision, the site issues and the emerging redevelopment ideas coming out of the consultation process.

The KHA consultation built on a significant amount of consultation work already undertaken over the previous two years by the Carriageworks Action Group (CAG). This meant that there were undoubted benefits to the process including a well articulated community vision for the site, an existing cohort of engaged and committed people, and established communication systems, including the excellent CAG website.

The themed workshops were particularly successful, and some innovative and varied consultation methods were employed to facilitate discussion, generate ideas and reach some consensus about a preferred option.

One issue that emerged from several workshops and local meetings was about the ownership and management of the community and commercial space within the new development. There were several suggestions made about how this might be done, as well as several possible commercial and community partners. KHA need to consider how best to respond to these suggestions, decide as an organisation what is possible and what it wants to do, and create an open and transparent process for proceeding with this.

Any successful consultation process requires adequate (and usually additional) levels of staff capacity, expertise and resources. KHA invested in and brought together a good team which included resourceful and experienced KHS staff, excellent architectural input from gcp Chartered Architects and good partnerships with CAG and Bristol City Council (BCC). gcp Chartered Architects in particular contributed some innovative ideas and a huge amount of excellent visual materials in a very limited timescale.

KHA had to accommodate a number of issues during the consultation process:

The biggest challenge was the short timescale and the time of year during which KHA had to conduct the consultation. Though the process may have been improved by having a longer timescale over a period when more people were available, nevertheless, KHA have undertaken a robust and productive consultation exercise, which has generated some brilliant ideas and provided excellent opportunities for local involvement in the design of this important site.

Though there is an agreed broad community vision, there are still a number of very divisive local issues that could have undermined the consultation process. These included the issue of street art, parking and traffic management, and whether or not to keep Westmoreland House. However, despite the differing (and sometimes passionately expressed) perspectives of participants, workshop events were overwhelmingly positive and collaborative, reflecting good planning and facilitation, and the genuine desire to see something happen.

3

Without physical access to the site, developing design options is made much more difficult, and it may be that all or some current preferred options may prove unfeasible when site access is finally secured. This threatens to undermine confidence in the consultation process as some design ideas may not in the end be able to be implemented. KHA and gcp Chartered Architects were good at explaining the limitations of the process.

The procurement process is complicated and difficult to understand, as is the Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) process. KHA are still only a possible provider, and needed to be mindful of this whilst also making a substantial investment into the consultation process.

Summary of issues that came up through the consultation:

Retention of Westmoreland House. There are views both for and against retaining Westmoreland House.

Carriageworks. Overwhelming agreement to retain Carriageworks (either all or frontage) with calls for the Carriageworks to be entirely community use (not flats above).

Parking. There are opposing views both for and against parking provision on the site.

Ownership of community and commercial space. Many contributors highlighted how important it would be to get the ownership and management of the commercial and community space right. This is critical to the success of the scheme,

Ashley Road junction. Many contributors identified that the Ashley Road junction with Stokes Croft and Picton Street does not work and identified the opportunity to re think and reconfigure this junction.

Through Routes. Need to be light and airy and feel safe. Future proofing the scheme needs to be considered with links to Hepburn Road and Kuumba Centre being considered.

Street Art. There were mixed views about the street art with an acceptance that whilst not always universally liked the arts was an integral part of the fabric of Stokes Croft.

What KHA are doing to address the issues, and where they cannot address them, the reasons why not:

Retention of Westmoreland House. During the consultation process KHA have been clear that a decision on whether to retain Westmoreland House can only be made once surveyors have been on site and more is known about the condition of the building. There was near consensus from one workshop group to “demolish Westmoreland House unless there is a compelling justification (in financial and design terms) to keep the building that becomes apparent once more information is known.”

Carriageworks. Research is being undertaken into the original design and layout to see what can be retained. More will be known when the developer has been on site. Retaining the entire building for community use will depend on finding anchor tenant (s) or someone prepared to take on the ownership (see below).

Parking. KHA are bound by existing BCC and KHA policies to provide parking for 3 bed properties. The current proposal has no other allocated parking provision on site. There will be space available for a car club and deliveries for the commercial / community space. Parking provision will be discussed in more detail with the planners and highways officers

4

from BCC. KHA will review car parking levels but more car parking at ground level reduces area for physical development and therefore affects scheme viability.

Ownership of community and commercial space. KHA have been approached by a number of potential organisations. KHA will ensure an open and transparent process of identifying a partner. KHA have committed to bringing partners on board early in the process. KHA acknowledge that having the space locally owned / managed would be an attractive solution for many local people but recognise the challenge of finding such an organisation with the track record and financial capability.

Ashley Road junction. Alterations to major highways falls outside of the existing development brief. However, gcp Chartered Architects have begun exploring and discussing options and highlighting these to relevant parties.

Through routes. Connections with Picton Street and through the site to Stokes Croft have been strengthened. Height of walkway in Option 1 has been doubled. Through routes to Hepburn Road and incorporating Kuumba Centre will be investigated and provision allowed if physical site levels and ownership issues look like they can be resolved / accommodated.

Street Art. KHA acknowledge the importance of the street art to many people and have committed to investigate ways of incorporating some of the existing street art and incorporating artists in any future public art programme during and beyond the construction phase.

In conclusion, KHA have undertaken an excellent consultation process, given the time constraints. However, it needs to be aware that the local community is changing, and that though there was a reasonable attendance at its own workshops and at other local meetings, it is still the case that there were a number of communities under-represented within the consultation. These include black and ethnic minority residents and business owners, young people, older people and people with disabilities. There is also a need for KHA to maintain communication with people beyond the few months of the consultation period – and indeed, some people indicated that they wanted to be kept informed and involved. It would therefore be useful if KHA could deploy some of its community empowerment staff to engage and hear from more hard to reach communities, and to maintain communication and engagement with CAG and the wider group of consultees.

5

2. Background The buildings and surrounding land which make up the Carriageworks and Westmoreland House site in Stokes Croft, Bristol are owned by the Comer Homes Group, a London based property developer that bought the site in the 1980s. The Carriageworks was designed by EW Godwin, an important Victorian architect. It is Grade II* listed but in poor condition and is on the BCC buildings “at risk” register. Westmoreland House is a 7 storey (including roof level tank room) 1960s concrete frame office building, last occupied in 1986 by the Top Ten Group who ran a football pools on behalf of the Spastics Society (now Scope). At the rear of the site is 4 Ashley Road, a derelict Grade II listed house. Together with land at the rear, the site is the same size as 1.6 football pitches or 0.51 hectares (taken from Carriageworks Action Group (CAG) website www.cariageworks.org.uk).

The Carriageworks Action Group is a broad alliance of local residents, business owners and people from local organisations working with BCC to address the dereliction of the site. In 2011, CAG and BCC undertook an extensive community consultation and produced a Community Vision that sets out the ambitions of the local neighbourhood for the redevelopment of the site. The Community Vision is available on the CAG website at http://carriageworks.org.uk/reports-minutes/community-vision-document/.

Over the last year, BCC has worked with CAG to procure a development partner in order to secure the redevelopment of the site. The medium term plan will involve purchasing the site either through agreement with the owner, or if this is not possible, through a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO).

The procurement process devised by BCC for a development partner has three stages and is currently at Stage Three. At Stages One and Two, KHA submitted information and a proposal for the site as part of the procurement exercise, and it has now been invited by BCC to submit further detailed proposals for the site as part of the third and final stage of the procurement process.

The third and final stage of the procurement process requires the design and delivery of a detailed consultation exercise, the development of a preferred redevelopment option, and submission of a detailed proposal to include scheme costs, financial viability, a technical audit and a statutory authority review.

BCC’s Statement of Community Involvement (adopted October 2008) recommends appointing independent facilitators to “provide professional independent facilitation to host forums, workshops or debates on controversial issues”. At the beginning of the consultation process, KHA appointed Vivid Regeneration LLP (Vivid) to facilitate all of the consultation workshops, record the feedback from sessions, and to complete this final report. This report is designed to be a standalone document to support and inform the design and planning process as suggested by Bristol’s Neighbourhood Planning Network Guidance Note dated November 2012.

3. Purpose of the report The purpose of this report is:

• To describe the objectives of the consultation undertaken by KHA • To detail the process of consultation carried out between July and September 2013 • To highlight the main themes and important issues arising from the consultation • To demonstrate how the workshops influenced decision making to arrive at a preferred

option

6

• To inform the Community Involvement Statement to be appended to the final pre-application submission

4. Purpose and objectives of the consultation As part of the Stage Three procurement process, KHA agreed to deliver a consultation process which would inform and create up to three redevelopment options for the site. The options were to be based on the Community Vision, as well as draw on input from attendees at a series of workshops, events and surveys delivered during July and August 2013. The purpose of the consultation process was to:

• Raise awareness about the Stage Three procurement process • Establish an on-going dialogue with residents, local businesses and other stakeholders • Answer questions about the site and the process • Further explore the CAG Community Vision and develop a more detailed understanding of

this • Debate and research the issues of redeveloping the site including:

o Ownership of buildings and community spaces o End uses for community spaces o Heritage and urban design issues and opportunities o Housing mix and tenure o Opportunities for green spaces o Management of the site

• Inform the development of a number of options for the site • Keep checking back as the options were further developed • Assess whether there was consensus around a preferred option and if not, to assess the

strengths and weaknesses of each option from the point of view of the various stakeholders.

Ultimately, the approach taken by KHA towards the consultation will be evaluated by BCC through the procurement process against how far it meets the following objectives:

• That a wide range of local residents and businesses were engaged, involved and consulted about the redevelopment options

• That decisions regarding the subsequent redevelopment were open and transparent to the local community

• That the (proposed and actual) community involvement process was compliant with the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement

There were a number of significant constraints to the consultation process including:

The very short time scale (July and August), which was set by the procurement process

The consultation had to take place over the summer period when people were away, again which was set by the procurement process

A complicated and bureaucratic procurement process, difficult to explain in layperson’s terms

The fact that there was no physical access to the site, thus any options had to include a “health warning” that they could be subject to change once site access was gained and more was known

The inability to access normally available consultees due to the complications of the procurement process (e.g. staff from English Heritage, BCC Planning Department)

On a positive note, the high quality engagement work undertaken by CAG over the previous 2 years meant that KHA were not asked to start an engagement process from a standing start. At all times,

7

KHA referred back to the CAG Community Vision as a starting point. This meant that there were already high levels of engagement from local stakeholders.

5. The consultation process 5.1. Overview

KHA has a good track record of community engagement and involvement. The organisation employs a team of dedicated community empowerment workers and delivers a range of activities and services within communities, based on the principles of ownership and action, connectedness and neighbourliness, resourcefulness and resilience, raised aspirations and capacity building, and cohesion and diversity with the aim of creating balanced communities for their residents. A recent KHA evaluation “Building Communities Together”, January 2013, found that out of a total of 26 neighbourhoods which benefitted from their community development services, 22 neighbourhoods showed a positive increase in residents’ satisfaction levels over a three year period. KHA also has a good track record of developing sites in Bristol’s inner-city neighbourhoods. Recent developments include Backfields, Junction 3 and Grosvenor Road, which all involved extensive consultation and outreach work. KHA has drawn on this expertise in the delivery of this consultation process. For this project, KHA appointed gcp Chartered Architects. gcp also have extensive experience of development within the inner city including St Paul’s Sports Centre and Junction 3. KHA initially developed a consultation plan and amended this until there was agreement with CAG and BCC about the approach. In summary, the consultation plan included:

• Preliminary briefing at an Ashley Neighbourhood Forum meeting • Preliminary briefing and facilitating consultation groups at a Stokes Croft Traders meeting • Preliminary briefing at St Pauls Unlimited Planning Sub Group • Designing and delivering 6 interactive workshops as follows:

o Workshop 1: Generating options o Workshop 2: Presentation of redevelopment options o Workshop 3: Commercial and community use o Workshop 4: Heritage and urban design o Workshop 5: General redevelopment options o Workshop 6: Feedback with CAG Liaison Group

• Designing and developing options for consideration at the workshops • Meetings with other stakeholders (BCC Planning) • Holding a public consultation weekend • Undertaking an online and paper based public survey • Regular information updates on the CAG website • A number of press articles and promotion through social media, e-mail groups, invites • Writing a final report

Each of the workshops was supported by a large display of the CAG Community Vision for those new to the idea of redeveloping the site. Additionally an evolving display of information pertinent to each workshop together with a feedback display of previous consultation events accompanied each workshop (see Appendix 4).

8

KHA recognised that not everybody will want (or be able) to attend consultation meetings or day time events. The consultation plan thus included a range of different ways of involving people – workshops, attending existing evening meetings and forums, drop-ins, on-line information, and open days. KHA used a range of methods to consult and inform people including local speakers, feedback at workshops, scoring preferences, surveys, on line feedback, public exhibitions, leaflets and posters, e-mail and local media. KHA also utilised established links with existing organisations and community involvement initiatives to get the message out, including the Neighbourhood Forum, St Pauls Unlimited and Stokes Croft Traders Association.

5.2. How the consultation process was promoted KHA used a variety of methods to promote the opportunities to contribute to the consultation process. These included:

E-mails to mailing lists of local groups – CAG, St Pauls Unlimited, Stokes Croft Traders Association

E-mails to wider communities of interest – the Neighbourhood Planning Network, Green Capital, Bristol Civic Society, local Amenities Societies and Conservation groups

E-mails to individuals with specialist knowledge for specific workshops

Ongoing updates on the CAG website and BCC website

Posters and leaflets

Word of mouth

Attendance at community meetings e.g. the Neighbourhood Forum, St Pauls Unlimited, Stokes Croft Traders Association

Press articles and promotion through social media channels

Public open weekend at an accessible venue on Stokes Croft (Bristol Credit Union).

5.3. Who contributed In total, 62 people attended the workshops (more didn’t sign in) with 38% of people attending more than one session. There was an average of 24 people at each of the workshops. There was a mix of residents, businesses, property owners, community activists and BCC staff.

150 people attended the public open weekend. Opening hours were 11am to 3pm on both days. The majority of people who attended the public open weekend had not attended the workshops.

45 people completed the online and paper based surveys. This survey was open for 2 weeks.

In summary, the promotion of opportunities to contribute to the consultation were good given the time constraints associated with this stage of the procurement process and the fact that the consultation happened during the summer period. Attendance at the workshops did not reflect the diversity and make-up of the local area particular in terms of ethnicity, age and disability, and more work is required to reach less involved and harder to reach local communities. However, there will be further opportunities for residents and community groups to contribute as the scheme moves forward. KHA must prioritise and adequately resource the on-going outreach work required to ensure that all voices are adequately heard.

9

6. Results of the consultation 6.1. Feedback from the workshops

A full write up from each of the workshops can be found in the supporting document “Notes from workshops”. Below is a list of the key themes and issues arising from each of the workshops.

Key themes and issues coming from the workshops

Workshop 1 Generating options

Invited: CAG Liaison Group plus additional invitees (identified by CAG as individuals with relevant skills, experience and interests)

Purpose: To inform people about BCC’s role in terms of CPO and procurement of preferred developer To introduce KHA and gcp Chartered Architects To provide information about timescales and activities for Stage 3 of the procurement process with a particular focus on community involvement To enable participants to put forward their more detailed views about how they saw the CAG Vision and the redevelopment of the site To begin to shape these ideas into a number of options

Summary of the workshop: The workshop was very valuable in terms of better understanding the CAG Vision and generating a more detailed understanding of what the vision could look like in more practical terms. Each of the elements of the Vision (community use, active frontages, through routes etc) was explored in more detail. The workshop also provided an opportunity for participants to be hands on, working with a site plan and helping to create a series of options in terms of layout and design.

Summary of Feedback from Exercise 1: Community Uses and Ground Floor Desire for family housing (at the rear) Desire for active retail frontages Local employment (at all stages) Commercial / retail units – getting the size right Community space – publicly accessible, not meeting rooms or a community centre Ownership and management of commercial and community space is key to this (needs to be a very engaged organisation) Community Uses and Ground Floor Importance of links with Picton Street and Ashley Road – links to Stokes Croft Future proofing a connecting route to Hepburn Road Service routes are contentious – no current consensus in terms of on site or on street Strong support for public square and market space (latter within Carriageworks) No private routes – not gated – all public routes and spaces Car Parking Strong arguments both for and against parking For – suggesting underground car park, parking for Stokes Croft shoppers (share this with residents at different times of the day), family housing needs parking, limited parking for deliveries and short stay Against – transport links are good, need to think and live more locally Upper Floors Residential – mixed, importance of making sure lettings works well, affordable, management of housing must complement ground floor activities Higher value residential properties in the Carriageworks

10

Commercial – home business, work/live space, start-up businesses Design – balconies for flats, living vegetation on roofs, retain Carriageworks, arguments for and against retaining Westmoreland House Design Sustainability and Environment - Environmental standards (Green Capital), local sourcing, energy efficiency, roofs and vertical spaces for planting, amenity space on roofs, involve local artists and designers, consider external funding Design – Inspiring (not standard), high quality, colourful, lasting quality (e.g. Hundertwasser House), mix Godwin architecture with contemporary quality Westmoreland House and Carriageworks – consensus on the need to retain Carriageworks (or at least the façade)- no consensus on the demolition of Westmoreland House, For demolition – ugly, creates shadows and darkness Against demolition – waste of resources and energy, tower is important part of Stokes Croft sky Line Delivery Funding and management - need funding partners (Arts Council, Heritage Lottery), think Big, Godwin always complained of a lack of vision, must be viable, need to sort management of commercial/community space Local benefit – local skills, self-build opportunities - “delivered by the community – facilitated by KHA” Feedback from Exercise 2: Generating Options During the second half of the workshops groups worked together to develop options for the site using materials provided. The options created informed the initial “options” developed by gcp Chartered Architects and presented at Workshop 2, which can be found in Appendix 1. Feedback from Workshop 1: Exercise 1 prepared participants for Exercise 2. Exercise 2 highlighted the challenges of the site. The exercise highlighted the difficulty in reaching consensus around design solutions.

Workshop 2 Presentation of redevelopment options

Invited: CAG + public open meeting + drop in

Purpose: To update attendees about progress to date To recap briefly on the Stage 3 procurement and consultation process To present outline redevelopment options from Workshop 1 To respond to initial questions and publicise the remainder of the consultation events

Summary of the workshop: The workshop enabled KHA to demonstrate how the options and ideas generated during Workshop 1 had been incorporated into the three design options (see Appendix 1). There was a presentation and a Q & A session with a panel.

Key themes and issues: The options all include parking in line with KHA and BCC policy for 3 bed properties though this is contentious. There are resident aspirations for improvement works to the Ashley Road/Stokes Croft/Picton Street junction, though this is not part of the redevelopment as such. Further work is required to reach out to the diverse communities living in the area. There was a proposal for a study into the role of public space and people flow. There was a desire expressed again for community ownership of any community space, and ideas for

11

a community energy company. There is a need to keep checking back as the options develop.

Workshop 3: Commercial and community use

Invited: CAG + targeted invitees + open meeting + drop in

Purpose: To engage and consult participants with expertise in commercial and community property development, management and investment, and enable them to share this with CAG, Stokes Croft Traders Association and other local stakeholders To share information about the local and wider economic context, and the commercial potential of Stokes Croft To develop more detailed ideas for the proposed commercial and community units, their size and number, potential uses, servicing and access issues and management. To agree what other actions would be useful to the successful commercial redevelopment of the site, and how other partners might contribute to this.

Summary of the workshop: A good mix of residents, local businesses, property management companies and council officers attended. The discussion at the workshop highlighted that there is a lot of common ground in terms of community aspirations for the commercial and community space. There is also a balance to be had between city wide and commercial interests, and the needs of local residents (current and future) for basic day to day shops and services. The workshop highlighted the need for KHA to consider how it will engage a partner to manage the commercial/community space. There was a lot of interest, which is positive. The process needs to be open and inclusive.

Key themes and issues: The need for commercial space for a local day time economy Lots of support was expressed for a market on ground floor of Carriageworks as well as ideas for a music school, art gallery, gym, and a roof top “Godwin” café Local residents need access to day to day goods (e.g. fresh food) and also access to services (e.g. Benefits/Legal advice) – “people moving in will be on a low income – don’t forget their needs” Work hubs – people working into the evening creating activity into the evening Artists and retail space – but not too may pop up shops – residents need consistency Existing local shared workspaces - Tucketts, Bristol Spaceworks, Ethical Property Company, Co-Exist – are all full or near full We don’t need a community hall – there are lots of these types of facilities already in St Paul’s It would be good to include an outdoor exhibition space Commercial and community use on upper floors – other professions supporting businesses Don’t be too prescriptive about end uses – get the space sizes right (under 250sq ft) What about commercial space on Ashley road too? Stage 2 application 750 sq m – could this be higher to create a critical mass? Corner shops within the housing development? Getting the right ownership and management of commercial space is crucial A number of local organisations and businesses are interested – and interested in being engaged early One option in terms of commercial/community space management is to set up a community land trust Management company needs to manage the lets carefully and consider local and city wide aspirations for the site Use basement of Westmoreland (if retained) for servicing Picton Street area needs careful consideration – already congestion and deliveries – could we use

12

the space better - right hand turning at Ashley road? We should have one provider for commercial waste – not five! Not everyone agreed about on site (bays) or on-road loading Linking with Kuumba and Hepburn Road – a missed opportunity – could it be designed later? Is front and back access to retail a security issue/storage issue? Back rooms of houses could be offices – not just domestic entrances Energy – roof space – what about a community energy company?

Workshop 4: Heritage and urban design

Invited: CAG + targeted invitees + open meeting + drop in

Purpose: To present the current 3 site options and update attendees on the work to date To raise awareness, share knowledge and discuss the heritage of both the site and the Stokes Croft area To discuss ideas for the retention of the Carriageworks building and other listed buildings on the site To discuss the reuse of other buildings on the site, specifically Westmoreland house To discuss and identify important Urban Design principles for the site and the surrounding area To generate ideas, projects and interest in preserving and recording the history of the site

Summary of the workshop: A fantastic workshop with local residents, amenities groups and experienced and knowledgeable architects and urban designers. “Heritage means many things. How do we capture the spirit of Godwin and also celebrate the importance of the street art and the existing bohemian feel of Stokes Croft?”

Key themes and issues: Buildings Keep the Carriageworks, but the first floor has collapsed and it needs a new structure inside. What else can be saved? The building is not deep. Use the ground floor as active open space and upper floor for residential – or if end user found the entire building could be commercial/community use –and could attract funding. No floors across windows. 4 Ashley Road is beyond repair/renovation – civil war memorial should be retained in some way. Westmoreland House –there was no consensus on whether it should go or stay and it is a contentious issue. The cost of demolition and information on structure is not known. It creates dark shadows. Demolition could lose floor space Consensus in one workshop that we should “demolish Westmoreland House unless there is a compelling justification (in financial and design terms) to keep the building that becomes apparent once more information is known.” Urban Design Not gated, through routes are important – but not dark tunnels; green space, sunlight, overlook the square with active frontages Don’t have confusion over the public and private areas Getting the density right is a challenge Shared space at Ashley Road – is this possible? An architectural destination that stacks up financially Preserving and recording the history of the site Celebrate Godwin – have restaurant named after him Street art – the area has an international reputation for this Development needs to reflect the fact that Stokes Croft has always been a place of enterprise, innovation and creativity Appoint a conservation architect, an artist in residence, hold an architecture competition

13

The ownership of the development is a factor in preserving the heritage 4 Ashley road could be restored and become a museum Before redevelopment, hire out the space to generate income for heritage projects Create an observatory on the site to see other historic landmarks?

Workshop 5: General redevelopment options

Invited: CAG + targeted invitees + open meeting + drop in

Purpose: To update attendees on the work to date To explain to the group how the 3 options were chosen and how they were further developed through the workshops To present the 3 options in detail To discuss and debate the strengths and weaknesses of each option To assess the options against the CAG vision To assess which option is preferred and which option should be brought forward for consultation on 14th/15th September

Summary of the workshop: Participants had the opportunity of looking at each of the three options. The majority who attended had been to previous meetings so this workshop built on their knowledge. Participants debated the pros and cons for each of the option and scored each option against the community vision. They were then asked to identify their preferred option. Option 3 scored highest in terms of meeting the community vision and as an overall preferred option. See the results of the scoring in Appendix 2.

Option 1 Retain Westmoreland House

Should we build higher than Westmoreland House? – already contentious

Double the height of the covered walkways – pull to the corner with Stokes Croft

None of the houses get full sun – imposing for Hepburn Road

Need to better define public /private spaces

Flats for disabled people

Planning policy is not helping – we need to challenge this around density, parking Option 2 Courtyard Development

Like the space/yard and commercial areas

Higher at the front, lower in the middle

Too big, too dense?

Extra floors on the Carriageworks – planners won’t like this

Shadows for neighbours

Square not as good as Option 3, change the name of private courtyard Option 3 Linear Park Development

Like retail and commercial space

Possible lay-by outside No 4 Ashley Road

Vision needs to be viable – need 95+ housing units to make this option stack up. Workshop 6 Feedback with CAG Liaison Group

Invited: CAG Liaison Group

Purpose of the meeting: Meeting to review preferred option(s) identified against the Vision. Discuss the process prior to the final public consultation

14

Summary of the meeting: Feedback and discussion regarding all of the workshops. Emphasised the need to be able to demonstrate how the workshops have influenced the design and the final option. Online and paper based survey should ask people whether the options meet the CAG Vision – or there is fear of opening up the whole “vision” process again.

6.2. Feedback from the public consultation weekend Feedback was generally positive as follows:

• People overall just wanted to see something happen with the site- it has been vacant for so long

• People were positive that KHA were selected to tender at this stage as they have a good track record and positive reputation in the area

• Lots of people were keen to see Westmoreland House retained- sustainability argument and why demolish if going to be rebuilt?

• Concern by some about level of car parking • Confusion about the procurement process and understanding what we were consulting on

at this stage • Generally all three schemes received positively • Good mix of people that attended- local and across the city • Huge interest in the site and project • Supportive of affordable housing • Concern that the redevelopment could increase the already high transient population in the

community- some people called for a stable community to help improve the area.

6.3. Results of the survey 45 people completed the survey either on line or during the consultation weekend. The questions can be found in Appendix 3. This is a small sample and people did not answer all questions. All respondents were from Bristol, predominantly from BS1,2,3 and 6 with a small number of respondents from further afield. Results were as follows:

Preferred option:

o Option 1 40% of respondents

o Option 2 22.5% of respondents

o Option 3 37.5% of respondents

The majority of respondents agreed that each of the three options met the Community Vision by category (community use, through routes), with only 1 or 2 people stating that Options 1 and 2 did not meet the Community Vision. 4 respondents stated that Option 3 did not meet the Community Vision.

Positive comments:

o “Excellent exhibition 15/9/13 by KHA – must strive for quality on this project.”

o “Option 1 has the most environmental sustainable argument for it. Least impact and making use of what we have.”

o “Would certainly use the square a lot. Could see myself walking through quiet a lot.”

15

o “Option 1 seems to offer the best all round use of the site, whilst retaining some original features.”

o “A market would work well at the Carriageworks”.

Concerns/issues:

o Overdevelopment/too many houses

o Need more family housing

o Not possible to score on design yet- not enough detail on this

o Shade from Westmoreland House

o Concern that Option 3 is not viable as there are fewer homes

o “Any through route should be light, airy and not covered – so none of these proposals are appropriate, they will simply not be safe to walk through and will require policing”

o Need more parking

o “Graffiti is an important part of the local heritage”

o Need to create opportunities for employment/small businesses

6.4. Feedback from other stakeholder meetings

Stokes Croft Traders Association, 23rd July 2013

KHA held a consultation session with traders at a meeting on 23rd July 2013, attended by circa 20 local business owners, 2 ward councillors, the police and BCC staff. After a brief presentation about the process so far, attendees were asked to feedback on what they saw as opportunities and threats. Key points were:

Opportunities

• We welcome a flagship development with good shops that would bring customers from the whole city and beyond – it needs to be big enough

• “The Stokes Croft Vibe” – need to maintain the dynamic, colourful, artistic, creative and diverse character of the area

• Good to have new commercial space, but not in competition with existing businesses • Opportunity to move existing traders into larger flexible work units • We need short stay customer parking and delivery facilities - this needs sorting out as an

integral part of the development. What about underground parking? • “Stokes Croft Market” needs to be seen from the road and be part of a pedestrian walk

through; should offer low overheads to serve and support local residents • Lots of local business expertise – pop ups, markets – use it! • Commercial space should be reserved for local businesses and start ups • Big potential for social enterprises on the site • Potential for start up businesses – creation of a business incubation hub like Paintworks,

multi-use with hi-tech businesses • Have proper recycling facilities – building on work to date • Food and drink outlets – not just drink • Increase local employment and use local labour in construction

16

• Needs to have high environmental standards – showcase green credentials – energy generation, roof gardens

Threats

• Could be a carbon copy of every other development – needs to be unique and stay in keeping with the area

• Current junction at Ashley Road/Stokes Croft/Cheltenham Road is dangerous. Could improve this with innovative traffic management – use S106 to improve wider site

• Management of commercial units is crucial – needs community input as well as property expertise

• Travellers – need to make some alternative arrangements • Need to avoid dark closed spaces and underpasses, havens for drug use and dealing • Street drinking and drug use – need to manage this better • Dealing with waste could be an issue • Consultation – are you going to involve more people and how?

Meeting with BCC Planning Officers

KHA and gcp Chartered Architects met separately with BCC planning officers. This meeting fell outside the scope and timescale of this report and KHA will be adding an addendum to this report to summaries the main issues.

17

7. How the workshops influenced the decision making to arrive at a final design option

Workshop Observation How this contributed to the design option(s)

Workshop 1 Activity 1 Broad consensus with the CAG Vision Disagreement around:

car parking

demolition of Westmoreland House

Wanting the development team to go beyond the vision:

Local employment and supply chain opportunities

Ambition for sustainability and environment

Parking has been informed by planning policy and KHS design standards - all options will need to comply with the minimum obligations of the above. Making sure that there are options with and without Westmoreland House Local employment and supply chain opportunities are important but beyond the scope of this stage of the procurement process. This could form part of the contract conditions should BCC sell the site to KHA post successful purchase or CPO. These thoughts were reproduced as part of the feedback display at the next workshop.

Activity 2 6 different sketch schemes were developed by participants working in groups. There was alignment of ideas that allowed for the distillation down to a smaller number of site ideas. This included:

Majority of housing at the rear of the site with higher development along the Stokes Croft/Ashley road frontages

Limited through routes linking Picton Street and Stokes Croft

2 sketch schemes kept Westmoreland House

4 sketches suggested future proofing links with Hepburn Road and Kuumba

Recognition that a realigned junction at Ashley Road could contribute positively to the

Four site ideas were created following this activity. They capture the essence of the sketch schemes for review with the KHA development team prior to proposing the principle of three design options (see Appendix 1). These ideas directly influenced the options reproduced as part of the feedback display at the next workshop. KHA also produced information boards to clarify the procurement process for subsequent workshops.

18

scheme and the area There was a lack of clarity around procurement process, timeline, physical context for the development.

Workshop 2 Enhancement clarification (display boards) helped people to better understand the process. Strong diverse desire for community ownership of community and commercial space.

The ability to integrate the impact of any community ownership at this stage is unachievable because no single group is available to consult with. However, this issue highlighted that should KHA be appointed, they should bring community organisations on board early to realise this aspiration and importantly inform the design. Commitment to raise this at subsequent consultation workshop and invite potential partners to come forward.

Workshop 3 Stage 2 application included 750 sq m of community space. Participants were keen to see this increased. The workshop highlighted the need for KHA to consider how it will engage a partner to manage the commercial/community space.

Final options show an increase in floor space for community/commercial use. KHA noted that increase level of floor space may impact viability. KHA will only be able to deliver what is financially viable. KHA are more aware of possible partners and the need to formulate a good process to engage and select a potential partner to manage any ground floor commercial / community space.

Workshop 4 4 Ashley Road – no strong desire to keep this though some aspect could be retained. Need to retain “with” or “without” Westmoreland House until more is known about the building. Conflicting ideas about what heritage is. Is heritage only the Carriageworks or does it include the street art?

Retaining the line of the Ashley Road house in one option. Through routes – have moved and walkways have become higher on Option 1. It was agreed more detail was required to support detailed discussion and understanding of each option. Additional design information would be produced for Workshop 5 that would update each option, incorporating both specific and general comments so each option could be viewed in light of the learning, knowledge and understanding gained over the past weeks.

Workshop 5 Discussion around walkways and ideas for making these double height. Good conversations about density and financial viability. Questions were raised again about

Final options show changes to walkways. Viability and density issue informed remodelling of Option 3 to increase the number of residential units.

19

the procurement process and why KHA were involved and no other organisations.

Many of the other ideas generated through the workshops could be delivered through any of the options as they are more to do with ownership, end use and architectural design.

8. Conclusions Overall, Knightstone Housing Association planned and delivered an excellent consultation process, given the constraints in which it had to work. The consultation process included a broad range of elements, including interactive workshops, events, presentations and surveys, and engaged a good cross section of participants. People were overwhelmingly pleased that finally something new would be built on the derelict Westmoreland House and Carriageworks site.

The three design options that have emerged from the consultation are all innovative and exciting, and have features that have genuinely caught the imagination of all those involved in the process. These design options provide KHA with strong ideas which will inform the on-going site development process and contribute to the anticipated successful outcome.

The consultation process also highlighted some of the on-going challenges of the site. These include very different local views about some key aspects such as street art, parking and traffic management, and the retention or otherwise of existing buildings. The consultation process was also constrained by the lack of physical access to the site, making all the design options provisional on actual site and building conditions when known.

In addition to developing the good design options, there were several other very positive outcomes coming out of the consultation process. These include stronger partnerships, particularly between KHA, CAG and BCC but also with other resident, community and business groups; the creation of some excellent information and design materials; and the engagement of a wider group of interested people and organisations, who made very constructive contributions and who need to be kept on board throughout the rest of the development process.

Appendix 1 Options

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Appendix 2 Scoring the three options

10

11

12

Appendix 3 Survey

13

Appendix 4 Additional information boards

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24